Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article calls for an ethnographic and theoretical investigation of removal (and specifically, deportation) that would broaden our understanding of the significance of this purportedly routine state practice. Based on fieldwork conducted in Somaliland in 2002 and 2003, it takes as its text the narratives of a group of Somalis deported from the United States and Canada following the events of September 11, 2001. As criminal aliens, the majority of these men (and one woman) had been incarcerated both as prisoners and as administrative detainees before being deported unexpectedly to stateless Somalia. Yet, the somewhat exceptional nature of this particular deportation highlights the various political and social exclusions that might be overlooked in the more regular instances of deportation (e.g., that of illegal immigrants and rejected asylum seekers). By following the trajectories of these Muslim deportees from incarceration in the host state to reincorporation/alienation at home, it points to the legal and financial domains that underpin presentday practices of deportation and the embodied and chronotopic experiences they effect. Further, this article outlines how future anthropological work on removal might proceed while underscoring the relevance of this field to the studies of citizenship and transnationalism, globalization, and governmentality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it